Summary
%
In a batch of Writ Petitions filed in this Court the petitioners challenged the imposition of sales tax and surcharge on bread, rusk and bun under the A.P. Sales Tax Act, 1957 as illegal, contending that bread and biscuits belonged to one homogeneous class but had been treated differently for purposes of taxation under Schedule 1, Item No. 117 and Item No. 129 of the Act, that the purchasers and sellers of bread and biscuits had been differently taxed, and that the multiple point tax violated Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.Dismissing the writ petitions,^HELD: The economic wisdom of a tax or lack of it are within the exclusive domain of the legislature. The only question for the Court to consider is whether there is rationality in that behalf of the legislature that capacity to pay the tax increased by and large with the increase of receipts. From any point of view, there is rationality in this proposition. It is sound commonsense and is in consonance with social justice. Therefore, the challenge to the imposition, under Article 14 as well as Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution is not sustainable. [9D-F]State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr. v. Nalla Raja Reddy & Ors. [1967] 3 SCR 28; New Menek Chowk Spinning and Weaving Mills Co.8 Ltd. and Ors. v. Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad and others., [1967] 2 SCR 679; Annapurna Biscuit (Mfg.) Co. and Another v. The State of U.P. and Another,[1975] 35 S.T.C 127 and Hoechst Pharmaceuticals Ltd. and Another Etc. v. State of Bihar and others, [1983] SCR 130, referred to.See the full content of this document
Extract
Sadiq Bakery Etc. VS. State Of A P. & Ors.
PETITIONER: SADIQ BAKERY ETC.Vs.RESPONDENT: STATE OF A P. & ORS.DATE OF JUDGMENT24/11/1987BENCH: MUKHARJI, SABYASACHI (J)BENCH: MUKHARJI, SABYASACHI (J)RANGNATHAN, S.CITATION: 1988 AIR 322 1988 SCR (2) 7 1987 SCC Su...
See the full content of this document